> What I can tell you, is that for simple use-cases this looks an awful lot like map-reduce I really don't think this is like map-reduce, map-reduce usually fo

> What I can tell you, is that for simple use-cases this looks an awful lot like map-reduce I really don't think this is like map-reduce, map-reduce usually focuses on pure functions applied in a series and/or in parallel, with the entire pipeline acting essentially like one large pure function that can easily be distributed. In contrast, this idea seems to focus on persistent side-effectful procedures that react to a string of events, with constant global syncing between an unbounded number of modules, which makes it impossible to distribute and highly non-pure. Also, this seems like a much more specific idea than Objects or even than Erlang. It specifically focuses on extremely small "objects"/"processes", it specifies rigid semantics for their communication, and a frankly insane composition model for the whole program. I'm pretty sure you could implement this in Erlang, but also pretty sure that this is not how most Erlang programs are written. Similarly, this is within the paradigm of Object Orientation, but it is a very specific example and that there are other (saner, imho) ways of composing Object Oriented programs that conform to the original Alan Kay ideas.